Summary: Mr X says poor organisation by the Council ruined his wedding day. The Council accepted fault because it did not inform Mr X trainee registrars would attend his wedding ceremony and offered him a partial refund of the wedding fee. There was fault by the Council which caused an injustice to Mr X. The Council took action to remedy that injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X says poor organisation by the Council ruined his wedding day. He says:
• The ceremonial interviews were unreasonably delayed, which meant he and his bride saw each other before the ceremony.
• A replacement registrar made an error in the marriage register book.
• He reserved parking spaces in front of the Town Hall but when his wedding party arrived the spaces were occupied by the previous wedding party and so his party had to park elsewhere before walking to the town hall.
• Four trainee registrars sat at the back of the ceremony room without his prior knowledge. The trainees talked during the ceremony and one gave him and his bride unpleasant looks.
2. Mr X wants the Council to provide a full refund of the wedding fee as well as compensation for the distress he and his wife suffered. He also wants an apology from the Council on its letterhead paper.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I reviewed the complaint and background information provided by Mr X. I discussed matters with Mr X by telephone. I sent a draft decision statement to Mr X and the Council and considered the Council’s comments on it.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X’s party arrived for the wedding ceremony to find the spaces they had reserved and paid for at the town hall were being used by another wedding party. They had to find parking at another location and then had to walk back to the town hall.
7. Mr X says the Council eventually refunded the fee he paid for the parking spaces but only after a lot of bureaucracy and upset.
8. Mr X says he and his wife opted to be interviewed separately before their wedding ceremony so as to keep to the wedding tradition of the groom only seeing the bride when she walked down the aisle on the wedding day. But there was a delay before he could be interviewed. A council officer asked him if he wanted to go outside for some fresh air and Mr X agreed. Mr X went outside just as his wife arrived for the ceremony. This meant they saw each other. This ruined the tradition of the day.
9. Mr X returned inside to demand an explanation for the delay. He was informed there was no registrar available to interview him. Officers then called for another registrar.
10. The replacement registrar then made a mistake when recording Mr X’s details on the register. The registrar crossed the mistake out with a large x on the page. Mr X was disgusted by the lack of professionalism. This was exacerbated by the registrar telling him he would not be charged for the error as it was not his mistake.
11. During the wedding ceremony, Mr X noticed a group of four uninvited council employees at the back of the room. He says they were talking amongst themselves during the ceremony and one of them passed unpleasant glares and disapproving looks throughout the ceremony.
12. In its response to the complaint, the Council said the previous wedding ceremony took longer than usual to conclude. The delay was unforeseen by the registration service and was beyond its control. It says its officers could not explain the delay to Mr X at the time because they did not know the specific reasons for the other ceremony going over its allotted time.
13. It acknowledged Mr X and his wife were upset because they saw each other before the ceremony but it said this was not the intention of the officer who suggested Mr X might wish to get some air.
14. The Council accepted the registrar made an error when recording Mr X’s details. It says this was corrected using the approved correction procedure. It says the registrar pointed out Mr X would not be charged for the error as a reassurance because a fee usually applies if corrections have to be made.
15. The Council said Mr X’s party could not park in the spaces they reserved because of the delay in concluding the preceding wedding ceremony. The spaces were occupied by that party and it says it could not have foreseen the delay. The Council acknowledges it could have taken enforcement action against the other wedding party by issuing penalty charge notices. But it says that would not have led to a different outcome for Mr X as the spaces would still not have been available for his use. The Council offered Mr X a refund of the fee he paid for the spaces. Mr X points out this was only after he chased matters with it.
16. On the presence of the trainee registrars at the ceremony, the Council says its usual practice is for new members of staff to observe a ceremony as long as there are available seats in the room. However, the registrar would usually speak with the couple involved prior to the ceremony to ensure they have no objections. In Mr X’s case, the registrar did not do so. The Council apologised to Mr X in its complaint response. It offered a partial refund of the wedding fee in recognition of this failing.
17. The Council questioned the trainees about their conduct at the ceremony. The trainees said they did not talk throughout the ceremony although they accepted they talked to each other when the ceremony concluded. The Council said a trainee was solemn but did not glare at Mr X or his wife.

Finding

18. I uphold Mr X’s complaint. There was fault by the Council which caused him an injustice. However, I am satisfied the Council has already taken action to remedy that injustice through the refunds it offered Mr X.
19. I note Mr X wants a full refund of the wedding fee. However, the wedding fee was for a service which Mr X did receive. With this in mind, I consider a partial refund presents a sufficient remedy for the identified faults by the Council.
20. I acknowledge Mr X’s sense of hurt and frustration because his wedding day was subject to the delay and errors by the registration service. But I do not find there is an unremedied injustice suffered by Mr X which warrants further pursuit of this complaint by, or a further remedy from, the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

21. There was fault by the Council which caused Mr X an injustice. However, the Council already acted to remedy the injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman